The pros and cons of social media
Decades ago, bridge collapses remained hidden until media coverage hours later. Today, CCTV and social media bring tragedies to the world's eyes instantly.
The steel frame of the Francis Scott Key Bridge sit on top of a container ship after the bridge collapsed in Baltimore, Maryland, on March 26, 2024. (Photo by Mandel NGAN / AFP)
Sixty years ago, the shocking collapse of a bridge after it was hit by a ship would, unless there happened to be a TV camera or a radio microphone on scene, have only emerged into the public consciousness hours later.
Yet, this week, when the Francis Scott Key Bridge in Baltimore in the US crumpled into the harbour, it was almost instantly being flashed across the world, thanks to CCTV video footage and social media.
The video captured events that would seldom have been seen by the public in previous decades… and it enabled probably billions around the world to witness and endlessly rewind the tragedy.
ALSO READ: Major Baltimore bridge collapses after ship collision
Everywhere you go these days, cellphones are ubiquitous and there is barely an event, even the most banal, which does not get recorded and posted on platforms in cyberspace.
The positive side of this is that investigations of accidents and criminality can be carried out more easily because of visual and audio evidence. Historic occasions can also be filmed and distributed. Tyrants and thugs are less easily able to hide.
The downside, though, is that we have become voyeurs, eager for life’s next reality TV fix, and have become addicts to vacuous content, which turns airheads into social media stars.
